Search for: All records

Abstract This study reports a comprehensive environmental scan of the generative AI (GenAI) infrastructure in the national network for clinical and translational science across 36 institutions supported by the CTSA Program led by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) at the United States. Key findings indicate a diverse range of institutional strategies, with most organizations in the experimental phase of GenAI deployment. The results underscore the need for a more coordinated approach to GenAI governance, emphasizing collaboration among senior leaders, clinicians, information technology staff, and researchers. Our analysis reveals that 53% of institutions identified data security as a primary concern, followed by lack of clinician trust (50%) and AI bias (44%), which must be addressed to ensure the ethical and effective implementation of GenAI technologies. 

It is difficult for instructors, and even students themselves, to become aware in real-time of inequitable behaviors occurring on student teams. Here, we explored a potential measure for inequitable teamwork drawing on data from a digital pedagogical tool designed to surface and disrupt such team behaviors. Students in a large, undergraduate business course completed seven surveys about team health (called team checks) at regular intervals throughout the term, providing information about team dynamics, contributions, and processes. The ways in which changes in students’ scores from team check to team check compared to the median changes for their team were used to identify the proportions of teams with outlier student scores. The results show that for every team size and team check item, the proportion of teams with outliers at the end of the term was smaller than at the beginning of the semester, indicating stabilization in how teammates evaluated their team experiences. In all but two cases, outlying students were not disproportionately likely to identify with historically marginalized groups based on gender or race/ethnicity. Thus, we did not broadly identify teamwork inequities in this specific context, but the method provides a basis for future studies about inequitable team behavior. 

The need for scientific ice drilling in glaciers and ice sheets has been driven by many fields of science, including drilling ice cores for evidence of past environment and paleoclimate information, and drilling access holes through the ice to gather data relevant to glacial dynamics, history of glacier extent, sediment sampling, and discovery of ecosystems within and beneath the ice. Many nations have contributed to drilling technologies relevant to each of these fields, and developments in any one nation often build on prior designs from other nations. A description of the very early polar ice coring endeavors in Greenland and Antarctica is provided in Langway (2008). Ice drilling and coring technologies that were developed before 2008 are well described in Bentley et al (2009), including a wide array of ice coring drills, drills designed to create holes in ice only, and autonomous instruments that melt their way through ice. The text by [Talalay 2016] provides a review of mechanical ice drilling technology that includes design, parameters and performance of an assortment of tools and drills for making holes in snow, firn and ice. Described in detail are direct-push drilling, hand- and power-driven portable drills, percussion drills, conventional machine-driven rotary drill rigs, flexible drill-stem drill rigs, cable-suspended electromechanical auger drills, cable-suspended electromechanical drills with bottom-hole circulation, and drilling challenges and perspective for future development. In this chapter our goal is to describe new ice drilling and coring technologies that have been designed, built, and used in the field in the most recent decade. Some of these technologies are improvements on prior drills, while other technologies such as a replicate ice coring drill, geologic drilling underneath many meters of glacial ice, and the rapid access isotope drill are the first of their kind. There are many additional ice drilling and sampling designs currently in the design or development stage that are not included in this chapter; rather our goal in this chapter is to describe proven ice drilling technologies that have been developed since 2009.