Tootfinder

Conical diffraction of the synchrotron beam to probe the efficiency and morphology of blazed gratings
K. V. Nikolaev, L. I. Goray, P. S. Savchenkov, A. V. Rogachev, A. A. Chouprik, T. N. Berezovskaya, D. V. Mokhov, S. A. Garakhin, N. I. Chkhalo, A. D. Buravleuv, S. N. Yakunin
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.23513

Conical diffraction of the synchrotron beam to probe the efficiency and morphology of blazed gratings
This study explores the use of synchrotron measurements as a nanometrology tool for blazed gratings. In grazing incidence geometry, one can measure both the conical diffraction and the diffuse scattering on the grating simultaneously in a single scattering pattern. The sensitivity of scattering patterns to the structure of the blazed gratings is evaluated. The diffraction component of the pattern is shown to be sensitive to the average groove profile of the gratings. Meanwhile, the diffuse scat…

Pattern formation and nonlinear waves close to a 1:1 resonant Turing and Turing--Hopf instability
Bastian Hilder, Christian Kuehn
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.21183 https://

Pattern formation and nonlinear waves close to a 1:1 resonant Turing and Turing--Hopf instability
In this paper, we analyse the dynamics of a pattern-forming system close to simultaneous Turing and Turing--Hopf instabilities, which have a 1:1 spatial resonance, that is, they have the same critical wave number. For this, we consider a system of coupled Swift--Hohenberg equations with dispersive terms and general, smooth nonlinearities. Close to the onset of instability, we derive a system of two coupled complex Ginzburg--Landau equations with a singular advection term as amplitude equations …

Overly academic/distanced ethical discussions
Had a weird interaction with @/brainwane@social.coop just now. I misinterpreted one of their posts quoting someone else and I think the combination of that plus an interaction pattern where I'd assume their stance on something and respond critically to that ended up with me getting blocked. I don't have hard feelings exactly, and this post is only partly about this particular person, but I noticed something interesting by the end of the conversation that had been bothering me. They repeatedly criticized me for assuming what their position was, but never actually stated their position. They didn't say: "I'm bothered you assumed my position was X, it's actually Y." They just said "I'm bothered you assumed my position was X, please don't assume my position!" I get that it's annoying to have people respond to a straw man version of your argument, but when I in response asked some direct questions about what their position was, they gave some non-answers and then blocked me. It's entirely possible it's a coincidence, and they just happened to run out of patience on that iteration, but it makes me take their critique of my interactions a bit less seriously. I suspect that they just didn't want to hear what I was saying, while at the same time they wanted to feel as if they were someone who values public critique and open discussion of tricky issues (if anyone reading this post also followed our interaction and has a different opinion of my behavior, I'd be glad to hear it; it's possible In effectively being an asshole here and it would be useful to hear that if so).
In any case, the fact that at the end of the entire discussion, I'm realizing I still don't actually know their position on whether they think the AI use case in question is worthwhile feels odd. They praised the system on several occasions, albeit noting some drawbacks while doing so. They said that the system was possibly changing their anti-AI stance, but then got mad at me for assuming this meant that they thought this use-case was justified. Maybe they just haven't made up their mind yet but didn't want to say that?
Interestingly, in one of their own blog posts that got linked in the discussion, they discuss a different AI system, and despite listing a bunch of concrete harms, conclude that it's okay to use it. That's fine; I don't think *every* use of AI is wrong on balance, but what bothered me was that their post dismissed a number of real ethical issues by saying essentially "I haven't seen calls for a boycott over this issue, so it's not a reason to stop use." That's an extremely socially conformist version of ethics that doesn't sit well with me. The discussion also ended up linking this post: https://chelseatroy.com/2024/08/28/does-ai-benefit-the-world/ which bothered me in a related way. In it, Troy describes classroom teaching techniques for introducing and helping students explore the ethics of AI, and they seem mostly great. They avoid prescribing any particular correct stance, which is important when teaching given the power relationship, and they help students understand the limitations of their perspectives regarding global impacts, which is great. But the overall conclusion of the post is that "nobody is qualified to really judge global impacts, so we should focus on ways to improve outcomes instead of trying to judge them." This bothers me because we actually do have a responsibility to make decisive ethical judgments despite limitations of our perspectives. If we never commit to any ethical judgment against a technology because we think our perspective is too limited to know the true impacts (which I'll concede it invariably is) then we'll have to accept every technology without objection, limiting ourselves to trying to improve their impacts without opposing them. Given who currently controls most of the resources that go into exploration for new technologies, this stance is too permissive. Perhaps if our objection to a technology was absolute and instantly effective, I'd buy the argument that objecting without a deep global view of the long-term risks is dangerous. As things stand, I think that objecting to the development/use of certain technologies in certain contexts is necessary, and although there's a lot of uncertainly, I expect strongly enough that the overall outcomes of objection will be positive that I think it's a good thing to do.
The deeper point here I guess is that this kind of "things are too complicated, let's have a nuanced discussion where we don't come to any conclusions because we see a lot of unknowns along with definite harms" really bothers me.

On The Road - Train to Xi’An 🚞
在路上 - 去西安的火车 🚞
📷 Minolta Hi-Matic AF
🎞️Kentmere Pan 200
#filmphotography #Photography #blackandwhite

Patterning surface textured plates with a viscoplastic fluid
Vanessa R. Kern, P{\aa}l E. S. Olsen, Marcel Moura, Andreas Carlson
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.23746

Patterning surface textured plates with a viscoplastic fluid
The deposition of a viscoplastic fluid onto a substrate can be achieved by simply moving apart two plates initially separated by a fluid filled gap, where the footprint shape depends on the initiation of a fingering instability. Here, we present another approach for the controlled deposition of a viscoplastic fluid by designing the macroscopic structures of the solid substrate. Through experiments in a lifted Hele-Shaw cell, we explore how slot, square, pyramid, and triangle-shaped patterns aff…

QPART: Adaptive Model Quantization and Dynamic Workload Balancing for Accuracy-aware Edge Inference
Xiangchen Li, Saeid Ghafouri, Bo Ji, Hans Vandierendonck, Deepu John, Dimitrios S. Nikolopoulos
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.23934

QPART: Adaptive Model Quantization and Dynamic Workload Balancing for Accuracy-aware Edge Inference
As machine learning inferences increasingly move to edge devices, adapting to diverse computational capabilities, hardware, and memory constraints becomes more critical. Instead of relying on a pre-trained model fixed for all future inference queries across diverse edge devices, we argue that planning an inference pattern with a request-specific model tailored to the device's computational capacity, accuracy requirements, and time constraints is more cost-efficient and robust to diverse scenari…

A Single Subject Machine Learning Based Classification of Motor Imagery EEGs
Dario Sanalitro, Marco Finocchiaro, Pasquale Memmolo, Emanuela Cutuli, Maide Bucolo
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.21724

A Single Subject Machine Learning Based Classification of Motor Imagery EEGs
Motor Imagery-Based Brain-Computer Interfaces (MI-BCIs) are systems that detect and interpret brain activity patterns linked to the mental visualization of movement, and then translate these into instructions for controlling external robotic or domotic devices. Such devices have the potential to be useful in a broad variety of applications. While implementing a system that would help individuals restore some freedom levels, the interpretation of (Electroencephalography) EEG data remains a compl…

$\Delta$-Motif: Subgraph Isomorphism at Scale via Data-Centric
Yulun Wang, Esteban Ginez, Jamie Friel, Yuval Baum, Jin-Sung Kim, Alex Shih, Oded Green
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.21287

$Δ$-Motif: Subgraph Isomorphism at Scale via Data-Centric
Subgraph isomorphism is a fundamental problem in graph analysis that seeks to find all instances of a pattern graph within a larger data graph while preserving structural relationships. This NP-complete problem is central to domains such as biological network analysis, social network mining, and quantum circuit optimization. Traditional approaches rely on backtracking algorithms like VF2, which suffer from sequential bottlenecks that limit their ability to exploit modern parallel hardware. In t…

Last week, I finished a book that I really liked but the one I followed up with was a letdown so I reckoned I would finally read Elana Ferrante’s “My Brilliant Friend,” which everyone says is so great and it’s on my shelf anyway, bu then I found this old edition of GB Shaw plays and I’m reading that instead, Pygmalion first. It’s very funny — I laughed out loud in Act V. Also — spoiler alert! — it has a better ending than the 1964 film (which I love anyway!).

More quotable quotes from Krugman:
❝Market pricing almost never takes into account the possibility of huge, disruptive events, even when the strong possibility of such events should be obvious. The usual pattern, instead, is one of market complacency until the last possible moment. That is, markets act as if everything is normal until it’s blindingly obvious that it isn’t.❞
1/2